Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal  CSPAN  August 30, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EDT

7:00 am
mentally ill. we will also discuss the cost of college and federal student aid with jack buckley from the national center for education statistics. "washington journal" is next. ♪ friday,ning, it is august 30, 2013. even as the british parliament voted not to join the u.s. in a possible strike. while administration officials said last night that the u.s. is considering taking unilateral action in response to a reported chemical weapons attack on syrian civilians and rebels last week, some congressional leaders said the white house has more work to do in making its case. as we take you through the latest developments this
7:01 am
morning, we want to hear your opinion on what you think the american public needs to know before america -- before president obama takes action. give us a call on the republican democrats, and independents, the numbers are listed on the screen. if you are outside the u.s., it 585-3883. you can also catch us on twitter and facebook or e-mail us. a very good friday morning to you. i want to take you right to the headlines about syria and possible u.s. involvement today. here's the front page of "the new york times." to one of those british
7:02 am
newspapers, "the guardian," out of london. prime minister said report shows damascus behind gas attacks. "the the front page of globe and mail" from canada. canada has no plans to participate in military strike. from a storyd you on the front page of the washington times obama may go solo against syria. president obama and his top aides try to rally support thursday for retaliatory strikes in syria. saying they remain convinced that assad used chemical weapons. british lawmakers questioned the thatgth of the claims forces loyal to present a used
7:03 am
poison gas. u.s. intelligence officials are uncertain who control serious stockpiles of poison gas. core u.s. national security interests are at stake. the white house steadfastly stood by mr. obama's claim that syria attacked its own citizens with chemical weapons saying the evidence is very convincing. we want to hear from you what responsibilities the president has to inform you before he takes military action. what does the public need to beforefore the ugly -- the government can act on syria? he wants to know why my child might have to die. george frank says why tell all and set our own people up for
7:04 am
slaughter? secrecy is paramount. we will be looking at all your tweets and facebook posts this morning. in,cebook post that came if thelic needs to know military is going to strike at syria, then we the people should have a say. that is edwin kristian on her facebook page. toby lee says this country belongs to all of us. if the government feels the public is not educated enough that tells us two things. one the government does what it wants and therefore does not represent us. to we need to educate the people , all of the people, not just those with money and connections. we are taking your calls and comments in this first 45 minutes of the "washington journal." i want to read this from "the -- "theon post yuriko
7:05 am
washington post." -- citing what it acknowledged was a limited but growing body of intelligence implicating the syrian regime in the deaths of about 250 people. the brief summary released by britain's intelligence community offered few specifics. a british officials appear to have left the obama administration to release its own intelligence assessment. cameron suffered a significant feat in parliament raising serious doubts that the uk could participate in any action.
7:06 am
officials call a pattern of past use of chemical weapons by resident assad. it dismissed as improbable syrians claim that rebels had staged the attack. i want to bring on jonathan allen of political to talk about -- of elliptic oh two talk about ofpolitico. >> the top party leaders in both chambers and members of relative committees and subcommittees. some of them weren't able to get on the call. >> what do we know about what was said and what information those members were given? >> there were a couple of big takeaways. number one, the president has
7:07 am
not made a decision. number two, there was the sense coming off the call that the president would go it alone even if there was not an international art and the ship. number three, the members of congress were making a pitch to the president that he needs to do more to convince their colleagues that this is the right thing to do. we are seeing tremendous revolt on capitol hill right now in congressmembers of signing letters saying that the president needs to seek authorization or should seek authorization from congress before using military force. the numbers are somewhere in the of members of congress have signed off on such letters.
7:08 am
there was a republican letter that had up to 140 signatures. there is a democratic letter that has 54 signatures. there is a little crossover between the two. given the fact that this is all just in the challenge of tracking down members of ,ongress who are on vacation getting all the signatures is a monumental task. you would have to assume that there is actually more reflected than just in the number of signatures. >> what is the timeframe if the president does consult with congress? members aren't going to be back in d.c. for a little over a week and a half, right? >> at the white house press conference, the president spokesman said there might be complications with all the
7:09 am
members of congress returning next week. i asked if that meant the strikes would happen before the consultation. he said they weren't going to get into a discussion of timeframe. what of the things the white house has tried to do is leave as president's options open to when the strikes might occur. tellscy pelosi the hawk brock obama to act on syria. take us through some of the leaders in congress loss reaction. i think nancy pelosi's was the most distinct. callrce familiar with the said the former speaker and current house minority leader thecally had agreed with person who spoke before her, speaker john boehner who said there needed to be more consultation with congress. she turned in another traction and urged it ministration -- in
7:10 am
another direction and urged the hagel, andion, chuck vice chairman of the joint thems of staff, she urged to do something to take action against assad. she was not specific. state kerry urged her to take action. the united states should take , this should come as a surprise to some leaders. nancy posey is generally known as pretty liberal and pretty hesitant to get into military conflict. she was pretty strong on this military action. the chairman of the foreign
7:11 am
relations committee bob menendez recommending the number. bob corker and came off that call. i think they were in position similar to before saying that they favored strikes on syria. levinve the members carl and jim imhoff they both had a very different view. imhoff of oklahoma said that there shouldn't be any strikes. carl levin said he wanted to see the president do more to seek international support. obviously the british pulled out of any coalition with a vote in their parliament. years, thisn recent is going to be something the president is ultimately going to make a decision on because the congress is not going to speak
7:12 am
with one clear voice on what he should do. >> jonathan allen is politicos white house journal chief. twitter on ourn question of what does the public need to know on military decisions, i'm just not sure why the public should know anything about military decisions except what they were and the final outcome. fromer tweet this morning on -- one last one from ron this morning. the public needs to know what should be clear is in the fog of war, indisputable evidence isn't always indisputable. dems should learn something from this.
7:13 am
next we have that from decatur, georgia. (202) 628-0205 > (202) 737-0001 >> we fly off to war, no, there are too many things here that needs to be taken care of. >> if the president is going to do something, what do you need to see from him before he should go ahead and take military action? shouldn't be unilaterally. he has to build a sizable coalition to go and do whatever needs to be done. >> thanks to be call on our democratic line from decatur, georgia. good morning, sir.
7:14 am
first of all, we will never get true facts from the media. biased and controlled. the united states president should apologize to everybody in the middle east for the fascism that we have shown them. jesse ventura who is a great american leader. i hope one day you will have him on the show to take questions. you will find that he is a remarkable human being you should have people like dennis kucinich. we have lost our government to zionism. >> stick to the question this morning. what does a public need to know before the president can take military action? >> the public needs to know from sources within the middle east, people themselves, of what is. >> thanks for the call.
7:15 am
let's go to our republican line now. dean is waiting from london, kentucky. >> good morning. we do not need to get involved in syria. we need to stay out of syria. >> that was deemed from london, kentucky. earnest took questions from including the media, major garrett from cbs news. i want to play a little bit of text change for you now. >> all i am saying is we have a history where mid-level people who may not have names but who have information raise her hands and say we are not sure. high-level people say we are absolutely sure. from thissking is, podium are you saying with absolute certainty that you know that every piece of chemical was retained by the control of the syrian government?
7:16 am
>> i am not in a position to offer you intelligence. the united states and this administration has vowed to release a public version of the intelligence assessment compiled by the intelligence community. you will have an opportunity to evaluate. let me finish. i will allow you the opportunity to consult that public document and to review and assess for yourself how could been seen you find it -- how convincing you find it. whatever that document is, it will have to differ from whatever classified document is also produced. evidence forhe these assertions. youe i can also convey to is that others who have seen that classified intelligence that includes leading members of congress and those parties, that includes leaders of our allies around the globe, that includes
7:17 am
members of the arab league, the most important collection of arab states. they have all seen this evidence and they have reached an assessment that dovetails with the assessment that we have conveyed to you so far publicly. the other part of this that is relevant is that there is other relevant information that you know about the use of chemical weapons, about the terrible effect that is had on the people in syria. >> that was at the white house press briefing yesterday. a few other stories on this subject. here's a story from cnn. rumsfeld says that obama has not yet justified the syria attack. rumsfeld said in an interview wednesday that obama has yet to
7:18 am
justify potential strikes in syria. he sharply criticized obama's administration for allowing details about intentional action to become public before any decisions have been made. saying, i can't imagine what they are thinking, why they would want the assad regime to have crystal clarity with respect to what they intend. as secretary of defense from 2001 two 2006. says there really hasn't been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to the situation. reallynk is -- what is important in the region is iran's nuclear program. the assad regime with respect to terrorists that kill innocent men women and children including americans.
7:19 am
one other story that i want to point out to you is in today's "financial times." this is talking about the british intelligence report that was released to members of parliament and to the british public. that story, an analysis by james blitz notes that the document released by the british government inevitably brought to my the immense controversy over the september 2002 dossier on for weapons of mass destruction. one former british official said that the torrent intelligence committees claim that it was highly likely that syriarrieou'k
7:20 am
was probably an understatement of what the security services really believed. my six and the gic were so badly over the iraqrow dossier decade ago that they will never ever want to be accused of sexing anything up ever again. go to daniel now from florida on our independent line. daniel, good morning to you. presidenthink the needs to show the american public before he can take action in syria? >> what i think this country needs to show is a little more accountability. we have people in the government going back as far as bush the father that do things under a certain pretense. then we find out afterwards that there was no legitimacy to it. iraq.s no reason to go to there is no weapons of mass destruction.
7:21 am
caller: it is just a history of this country being very aggressive in doing whatever they want to do. the government does not let the people know what is really going on. there's always an underlying reason that we are never told. >> host: david. we really don't need to get involved with their life. they got nothing out of the iraq war, we got nothing out of the iraq war. tell me what we can accomplish by going over there and doing something with a dictator like the gentleman in syria or iran. we need to take care of things that are here in our own land and not worry so much about
7:22 am
those people. as sad as it may be for those people to be doing what they're doing, what else can we do? host: don on twitter says if civilians are supposed to be supreme in our republic and the citizens must do everything the military is doing. something is not needed. here is a picture in today's "washington post" of the guided cruiser gettysburg. moving intors are the mediterranean for preparation of a possible attack on syria. a picture in today's "washington post." you anotherow article that deals with possible
7:23 am
attacks on the area. it shows possible french and british assets. american cruise missile destroyers are already in the mediterranean. the harry truman is moving into the mediterranean. there is also the u.s. nimitz battle carrier troop which is in the persian gulf. the u.s. has f-16 strike aircraft in jordan and u.s. patriot missiles in jordan. least one have at ship or sub in the mediterranean. there is a french aircraft carrier stationed in the mediterranean in the south of france. there is also at least one carryingruise missile vessel in the mediterranean. we are taking your questions and comments this morning. saltel is up next from
7:24 am
lake city utah on our democratic line. >> : i think it is misleading because the vote the british parliament took, although it was negative, they did talk extensively about the fact that they were going to have another vote and they wanted to wait for the u n inspectors to get our information. more information about whether or not the chemical weapons were used by the assad regime. the fact that they were going to wait for that information and then have another vote. i think that that article was a little bit misleading. to move the other articles were misleading because they are planning on waiting for additional information and then taking a vote. they might make a vote that says
7:25 am
they are going to take military action. >> er: in an interview with the bbc, the bbc defense secretary philip hammond says that he 285- 272 vote without any military intervention -- intervention by the united kingdom. was that the first article you read? come to our question of what the public needs to know before obama can move forward with unilateral action. i think one of the most important things is that iran said they are going to possibly attack israel or somebody else is going to attack israel. you know that israel is going to
7:26 am
respond. how they might respond, are they going to go nuclear? what are we going to have? those of the questions i would like answered because at this point it could escalate into a very difficult situation for us. we might have additional and to tryve military action to stop what might happen. that is michael from salt lake city, utah. >> host: that is a picture of one of the gas mask factories. from maynard,next massachusetts on our independent line. >> caller: how are you? i want to comment. one of them was artie brought up by the gentleman before me about the british not saying no
7:27 am
completely. they are just waiting for more information and the inspectors to come and give their report. at this time they're saying no, but they did not rule out that they would not help us. i was up all last night listening to those guys fight in the parliament. i know exactly what they were thinking. if they get the right information they will come with us. but the one they had with iraq was a bad one and they still have a bad taste in their mouth. other one was they think obama should go to the congress and listen to these guys, you know? if we're going to do it, i would rather have the congress behind him instead of him standing out there by himself and getting his rear and chewed up. i would rather have the whole ongress do it. >> host:
7:28 am
host: >>host: this is prime minister cameron talking about the public's confidence in how it needed to be rebuilt following what happened in iraq. take a listen. >> when i spoke to president obama last weekend, i said we shared his view about the despicable nature of the use of chemical weapons and that we must not stand aside. because ofained that the damage done to public confidence by iraq, we would have to follow a series of incremental steps including at the united nations to build public confidence and ensure the maximum possible legitimacy for any action area at the steps are all set out in the motion before the house today. 2003, i wasn sitting there to rose from the back on the opposition side. it was just after my son had been born, but i was determined to be here. i wanted to listen to the man
7:29 am
standing right here and believe everything that he told me. we are not here to debate those issues today, but one thing is indisputable. the wealth of public opinion as well -- the well of public opinion was well and truly poisoned. that was british prime minister david cameron yesterday. we are taking your calls. before we take more of your calls, let me point out some of the other articles that are in today's papers. this on the front page of the "washington post." this is the lack budget as it is network.r the u.s. spy the story notes that the $52.6 billion black budget for fiscal 2013 was obtained by the washington post from
7:30 am
intelligence contractor edward snowden. hasough the government annually released its overall level of intelligence spending since 2007, it has not divulged how to use the money or how it performs against a goal set by the president and congress. the nationalor intelligence program details the successes, failures and objectives of the 16 spy agencies that make up the u.s. intelligence community. of that $52.6 billion budget, that the largest amount went to three agencies. "the washington post" has a separate section that details
7:31 am
much of what they found from int black budget document today's paper. if you want to read more. another story i should note for you, the atf swears in permanent --ector fights president swears in permanent director. b. todd jones is in the picture. the obama administration on thursday imposed new limits on the import of military surplus firearms and closed a loophole that allows felons and others to get guns by circumventing background checks. the actions, as the administration strives to reduce gun violence after congress failed to pass legislation in
7:32 am
the wake of last year's shootings in newtown, connecticut. atf issued legislation that closed a you -- that closed a loophole. i want to play a bit of what vice president biden had to say yesterday when he unveiled those two new proposals. >> last year alone, there were of000 requests for transfers these restricted firearms to trusts or corporations. is using the regulations to close that loophole. the proposed rule requires people associated with these kinds of trust or corporations to go through the same
7:33 am
background check that individuals have to. whichl and this means by these most dangerous weapons will get to people who are not allowed to own them under the law. it is simple, straightforward and common sense. it will make sure that dangerous weapons don't end up in the hands of those who as a matter of law are not entitled to own them. the second action we are taking is to prevent know terry great firearms from being reimported back to the united states. as you know, we sell military allies,rearms to our around the world. those firearms are not able to be imported back in the united states without u.s. government approval. >> host: that was vice president joe biden talking about new
7:34 am
legislation. calls anding your asking what the president needs to know before you can make a military decision. plenty of opinion pieces out there in today's papers on the subject. we need answers on syria, and an opinion piece in today's use ofgton times," weapons by the syrian regime is inconclusive. we want to get your thoughts this morning. we go now to regina from apollo, pennsylvania on our republican line. we need to know that our congress is going to get an opportunity to declare war before mr. obama who has been chomping at the bit with lindsey and john mccain for a long time. to help theeir push
7:35 am
muslim brotherhood over there who are killing christians, burning churches. this is not something we need to be involved in at all. we have already been there and done that. we don't have resources, the money, or any desire for anything that we can gain from this except more lives dead, more ptsd from soldiers coming home with legs blown off and more things that we don't belong and with regards to -- we really don't know if assad has the muslim brotherhood over there. aat are we getting into beehive's nest for? >> host: on that subject, this
7:36 am
piece from "wall street journal," president sidelined his decision on forced. thewriter notes that constitution signs more powers to congress. in contrast, the president's sole military function is that of commander in the armed forces. president hasthe exercised wide latitude over military actions him often with minimal involvement with congress. there have been hundreds of military deployment since 1798. only 11 of them were wars declared by congress. it notes that over the years congress has not insisted on its meaningful involvement in many uses of force, and therefore it
7:37 am
has ceded some of its power. let's go to robert now from texas on the democratic line. >> caller: thanks for taking my call. i think the perfect need to know the real reason why -- the public's need to know the real reason why is not about this america weapon, it is through the neocons trying to empower satan around the world. if he can do this he can come up with a new world order that resident bush warned about. anthony, what do you think the public needs to know
7:38 am
before the president can take military action? this is a lot more complex than whether the syrian government cast. there is not a strong command of the american public in understanding the proxy wars that are playing out. the saudi arabians have been funding a lot of what has been going on. we trying to analyze this? died, a thousand syrians but 850, whether they were muslim brotherhood, there is no moral outrage about that. the media kept that under the wire as best as they could. took placeher event it was all over the news. there is a proxy war between turkey, saudi arabia, iran.
7:39 am
would it help for someone to go on tv and explicity geopolitical issue? >> is going: whether it to be us or not or whether it is going to be the saudi arabians or the iranians or the israelis, i think the american public has a right to know so they can decide whether they are willing to participate in this process. ,hoever is influencing on chris which we know there are a lot of influences from abroad whether we like it or not, will with regard to whether the congress votes or not, the congress is going to do what they want to do. when the iraq war was taking place and there were millions of people on the street saying we don't want to go to war, we still went to war. it doesn't matter what the general public wants. the associated press
7:40 am
this morning gave a rundown of what is going down in different countries and organizations. it notes that the united nations, a meeting of the security council numbers ended quickly with no sign of progress on an agreement over syria's crisis. and experts in syria are expected to leave the country on saturday. in turkey, officials placed turkey on alert of possible attacks from syria. bunkers were designated in seven border areas to protect people in the area. it also notes that in year on president has signed ronnie will h -- presidentasan .ohani asked's foreign minister the u.n. to continue its inspection. a former minister spokesman said
7:41 am
the team should inspect three other locations including a regicide aleppo where -- where rebels have used poison gas. headline, obama administration will not lock state marijuana laws if is to be she is regulated. the obama administration on thursday said it will not stand in the way of colorado, washington and other states where voters have supported legalizing marijuana. as long as those states maintain strict rules involving distribution of the drug. in a memo sent to u.s. attorneys in all 50 states, deputy attorney general detailed the administration's new stance even as he said that marijuana remains illegal under federal law. story i want to point out to you.
7:42 am
this from the "wall street journal." married same-sex couples will be treated just like their heterosexual counterparts for federal tax purposes in a matter where they eventually live. under thursday's ruling, same- sex couples will be treated as married for federal tax purposes, including income as well as gift and estate taxes. that covers couples who marry in one state and move to another. as a result, lawfully married same-sex couples no longer have to declare themselves unmarried on federal income tax returns. same-sex spouses won't have to pay tax on health insurance benefits that they receive through a spouse, and item that costs an average same-sex couple over $1000 a year in extra tax according to the human rights campaign. "ad more about that story in wall street journal."
7:43 am
public need to know when it comes to military decisions, specifically what the white house is looking at in syria. david is up next from akron, ohio on our democratic line. say what the public needs to know is, why is the united states meddling in syria's business. in iraq and iran, they didn't meddle with the united states when they were hanging black people and burning black people and how we treat people over here. you are talking going back to the battle for civil rights, david? >> caller: i'm talking about the treatment of people in the united states. to the united states is not really up on treating their people right heard we need to get things right in our own house. >> :
7:44 am
do you think a chemical attack justifies u.s. involvement? >> caller: no i don't. ali, good morning. go ahead. the public needs to understand that we stand as a country for justice and equality rights for everyone, not just for american citizens but also for citizens abroad and all human beings everywhere. it is evident that all the chemical warfare that has taken place has happened throughout the middle east. of interestconflict throughout the many different countries and for political interests throughout the world. we have to understand that we have to have a pullout plan. i believe that we should go as part of the u.n. and stand for
7:45 am
those rights as other people's lives have to be justified. in syria there have been countless attacks with chemicals. civilians,ttacks of women and children, innocent people who have no political poll whatsoever who are just getting mass murdered every day. we can't allow that to happen as far as history will repeat itself. >> host: that was on leave from columbus, ohio. how will assad retaliate to our question. start gassing. russia is already moving a ship into the area. this person is responding to is a missile cruiser flagship in russia's black sea fleet. you can see pictures of that
7:46 am
ship in today's "usaid today." c is from sterling heights, michigan on our democrat line. concern is why are we so concerned about what is ? we were notyria so concerned when israel used nerve bombs and phosphorus cast. we went not concerned about that. what incidents are you referring to? when they attacked gaza. they used phosphorus gas and that is a chemical weapon. we did not say anything against israel at that point. host: >>host: think that there is nothing the president can show that can justify a military
7:47 am
decision? >> caller: he is going under the same assumptions that osha went under. it is an incomplete investigation and they have their hands on the trigger. they are willing to pull on the trigger any time. that is all the time we have in the first section of "washington journal." we will next speak with peter will --ater will laterh weo will be joined by -- we will be joined nberg. homn >> one of the most fun times
7:48 am
ever had was in 2006 and it looked like democrats really were going to take back the house. it was looking pretty bad for republicans. vice president cheney's office called and wondered if i could come over and have breakfast with him. we went over to his residence and had breakfast. i had met him before. it was unbelievable how much he knew about these districts. basically he was sort of asking us how bad is this. saying yes, for republicans it is pretty bad. it's pretty fun when you can do that or talk to various caucuses on both sides. you can get a glimpse of the inside players.
7:49 am
>> charlie cook has uncovered the trends while endeavoring -- while covering congress races. >> very often what you see as the causes of the first ladies become so entwined with her image that she keeps that cause and that image through the rest of her life. we could talk about rosalynn and her commitment to mental health. barbara bush about and her commitment to literacy and her foundation. betty ford and her commitment to sobriety and addiction. opennday night, historians season two of c-span's original series on first ladies. private livesir
7:50 am
and public roles monday night at nine eastern on c-span c-span " continues. >> a former senior advisor to the romney 2012 campaign. i want to start by asking you the same question we have been asking our viewers this morning. what is the white house's responsibility when it comes to making its case for action in syria before going ahead with that military action? they would have to convince the public that a strike was in the interest of the united states. it can have a humanitarian component or a geopolitical component. i think the burden is on the white house to make the case for a strike. willmust prove that there
7:51 am
be a better outcome in serious than previous conditions. the way the administration is handling it right now is terrible. fear in terms of syria is that the administration what is calleds strategic bombing. it is limited duration, limited scope and there is nothing to alter the balance of power on the ground. concerning what that would do is involve united states in the civil war, but actually a side will emerge stronger, not weaker from the bombing. i think right now the way the administration is handling it is not good. they have not articulated what our national interest is in terms of the strategy they are pursuing. >> host: are you in favor of a strike in syria now? uest: >>guest:
7:52 am
make the you can argument that we shouldn't be involved at all. the situation is hellish. the window is closed in terms of opposition groups that are relatively moderate. worse if we do get involved. on the other hand you do try to get involved and balance -- try to change a balance of power. thatry to deliver a blow would debilitate the assad regime and arm and train rebel forces. the syrian rebel army is geographically isolated in the country. you do this in hopes of getting together a coalition. that is a different strategy and there is an argument for that. in the worst of all worlds, we would get halfway into this, do pinprick strikes, get us
7:53 am
involved but have no real effect. the white house has promised some sort of assessment on what they know about the situation in syria. the intelligence agencies did not believe there was a slamdunk case in terms of assad having given a green light to chemical weapons. appearsot have, but it clear that there was regime use of weapons. that is a problem for obvious reasons, but the administration has shown a stunning diffidence when it comes to trying to convince the american people that they ought to support the strategy. the president seems to be
7:54 am
unbelievably reluctant. what he is talking about right now is the most reluctant and telegraphed a military strike in american history. i think that the administration's fixed forum, they're not going to do much in the way of convincing american people to support this. the bushyou worked in white house, a lot of stores today talk about how the iraq war is hanging over this decision and the assessments leading up to the decision. what role are you seeing the iraq war playing in what is happening now? did that effort discredits the intervention for the foreseeable future? >> guest: there's no question that iraq is overhanging this debate heard you see that in the bad defeatere was a for prime minister cameron
7:55 am
yesterday when parliament said they're not going to support what he wanted which was britain's intervention with military strikes in syria. i will say in terms of the iraq war there are certainly problems. executed a war, but it is important to bear mind several things. number one, the objective was achieved to get rid of saddam hussein. secondly, by the time doesn't bush left office, iraq was a fairly pacified country. we had if very difficult. plan for the al qaeda insurance that came in. -- iraq was descending into civil war, but the president endorsed a third strategy which was executed brilliantly by david petraeus. violence was down and the various factions and ethnic
7:56 am
groups were actually negotiating what happened after that. forces obama was to our from iraq because he never supported the war. we lost our leverage their. iraq, like so many other countries in the middle east, is n the downward path. >> host: >> host: were you surprised what happened in parliament yesterday? question there is no in the west there is a kind of war weariness that is a product of afghanistan and some other things. kingdomic in the united really turned south on the iraq .ar and they have continued i will say when tony blair was prime minister, he was a courageous leader and i still think you made the right decision.
7:57 am
your commentske and calls. he was a speechwriter for the 2012 romney campaign. you can also see his pieces in commentary magazine. we will go to the phones. robert is up first from west columbia, south carolina on the republican line. i want to ask how much harder it is for neoconservatives to sell these wars to americans? most americans realize that the twin towers were brought down with create planned explosions on 9/11. his conspiracy
7:58 am
theories are looney, but usually when a derogatory term people refer to neoconservatives. music conservatives -- neoconservatives that supported the iraq war have a hard time explaining. i'm not going to argue that there. -- that there is a kind of war weariness. in ability to shape events foreign countries and foreign cultures, particularly the middle east where civil society is practically nonexistent, where they have very little experience with democratic makes public policy possible. it is a very difficult task to know what to do and how those
7:59 am
countries governed. one way that you can't do it is from a distance without any aid, without any involvement at all. is there a way of punishing serious with the -- for using chemical weapons without going down the entanglement road. there are about 20 or so air bases in syria, six which are primary. you could target those six airbases and take them out. what that would do is remove the capacity that president asad the rebel to pound forces. that is what he has been doing. that is one way to do it which boots onget us into the ground.
8:00 am
but it would be a serious strike that would debilitate to a large extent the asad regime. isther thing you could try to decapitate asad himself. target him and kill him. there are various ways to execute a military strike short of boots on the ground. i think the way the administration is inclined to do .his it notes that we support a larger military intervention in that regime change. short of that any u.s. military strike should focus on doing enough damage to the syrian air force so that rebels can change the regime themselves. that is from today's "wall street journal."
8:01 am
we have an international court, don't we? i can't understand why they are not going in and arresting him.
8:02 am
8:03 am
>> i like to point out it's still a speculation this guy has not used chemical weapons against his own people. however you can go on youtube and see three different videos of the rebels themselves loading chemical weapon and firing them into their cities. i have a hard time believing that assad would turn against his own people and start using chemicals against his own people. you can see the rebel forces that trying to help now without even being asked to, their going
8:04 am
out and killing people they think is part of assad. i watched on youtube just a few days ago where two 13-year-old kids were gunned down because they thought they were assad sympathizers. any type of power that condone that type of behavior, i don't want to have in control of any country much less syria that's so close to israel and all of our other close allies there in turkey. we have china and russia who are supporting assad. russian troops are there in syria guarding the chemical compounds where they store chemical weapons. if we start shooting at those chemical compounds that the russian themselves are guarding, we're going to wage war against russia and china is another serious of syria that we don't want to contend in. host: talk about the evidence of chemical weapon usage that we've season so far echoed by
8:05 am
jeffrey, why would assad use chemical weapon knowing it will trigger international anger and fury. guest: what does assad do? he use chemical weapons. american intelligence confirmed he used it several times. we know he has done it. he well could have thought, i used it already and i crossed this red line and nothing happened so he wouldn't anticipate an american response. second reason you use something like chemical weapons, this is pretty well known, the history
8:06 am
of chemical weapons it's meant to terrorize the rebel groups that are trying to oppose him. the question asked by the caller is a good one, essentially he's arguing saying, why would the rebels use it. how much evidence is there for the fact that assad used it. we know the caller said he find it surprising that assad would do such a thing. i want to underscore he has and he is an evil figure. the idea he will kill his own people wouldn't come as a surprise. there are reports from various intelligence agencies not just our own, that assad has used the chemical weapons. the doctors on the ground who have no dog in this fight have
8:07 am
reported the same thing. the final thing i would say is that the obama administration clearly does not want to get involved in this war. they have come to the conclusion that assad used chemical weapons. i haven't seen the intelligence. the stuff it tricky. a lot of time you don't have an ironclad case but the evidence seem to be that he used it. i assume that's the case. host: i want to show the cover of this week's economist with the headline "hit him hard." that's the picture of the front page of this week's economist. the lead item is present the proof, deliver an ultimatum and punish bashar assad for his use of chemical weapons i want to get your response to some of the larger international issues. that piece notes that no option is perfect from the pentagon to
8:08 am
britain parliament. doing nothing is the only peru don't -- prudent course. look at iraq. it notes doing nothing carries risks that are even bigger. if the west tolerates such a war crime, mr. assad would freer to use chemical weapons. we have stepped up mr. obama's redlines several times. american threat must count for something. it is hard to see how mr. obama can eat his word without the super power and losing correct with -- credibility with the likes of iran and north korea. guest: again the question is what is the nature of the response. it says the president would lose
8:09 am
credibility if he doesn't true. if you have a 48 hour bombing in which it's been advertised by the president, he used the phrase in his interview with the news hour, a shot across the bow. what does a shot across the bow mean? it means you intentionally miss the target you want. the administration gone out of its way to say that assad will not be targeted. the stated policy of the administration from two years ago is that assad must go. i assume that's still the case. now we've got a situation in which we're going to use probably military force and the president is saying, that we're not going to dipose the assad regime. the president puts himself in this box by declaring the red
8:10 am
line. he didn't think assad and the syrians could cross it. they called his bluff. he didn't do anything. he done it again. if he doesn't do anything now, it would be a terrible blow to american credibility. if he does this strike the wrong way, it will be a terrible blow to american credibility and get us into this civil war without a coherent strategy. host: monty asked for twitter. who are interests in syria post assad? guest: our interest there is to have a stable regime with secular forces not jihaddist forces in control. that is relatively moderate and proamerican. look i'm sympathetic to the idea of over throwing assad. he is one of the me never lent
8:11 am
figures on the world stage. it a con for hezbollah terrorist in lebanon. he's complicated our life. one other thing you asked about north korea and iran with all of this signaling to them. it's signaling to them weakness. this has been going on for the entire obama presidency. this is nothing new. i think we've reached rock bottom at least in the obama presidency. i'm worried it's going to get worse. there's no way the iranians haven't witnessed the way president obama handled syria and the larger issues in the middle east. host: peter wehner is former senior advisor and speech writer for the romney 2012 campaign and
8:12 am
also worked in the george bush white house. he's taking your comments and questions as we discuss syria this morning. jerry is up next from cookville, tennessee. jerry good morning. caller: good morning. the president is talking about the shot in the bow. i find it frightening when it comes to this president and foreign policy. it was a game of chess, i believe it would be a check mate game against this president. he's done nothing but absolute disaster. look at north africa. look at that. some democrats are calling it a success his foreign policy.
8:13 am
it's frightening what's happening. i don't see anything that's any good. just think, if he happen to won the nobel peace prize, how bad things really might be. host: we'll go to democratic line, dave is waiting from washington d.c. good morning. caller: peter. the reason that the u.k. not to proceed is because there was a lack of conclusive evidence. in the regions and suburbs of damascus there is not conclusive evidence that the chemical weapon attack were perpetrated by a horrible attack regime. the obama administration has made entirely clear that they will act militarily but inner trying to determine if in fact it is the regime that has committed these acts.
8:14 am
you served in an administration that was willing to act in the absence of such conclusive evidence and we saw the results of in the nine years that followed. no independent organization has confirmed that it was gas used in gouda. no delivery method has been confirmed. there are other chemical agents used in syria including far less potent which can kill or readily available and have been used by the rebels and projectile have been analyzed. not having the chemical stabilizers that you will see weapons used by the regime. host: hold on a second. guest: look, dave hasn't seen the intelligence and neither have i. can i say that we know for sure that the assad regime used
8:15 am
chemical weapon? no. the obama administration concluded that he is used them before. the obama administration clearly, the president said he's convinced that assad used chemical weapons. i assume the evidence is pretty strong because the president does not want to act so there must be a lot in terms of tipping the needle toward it. we have other intelligence agencies in the world that confirm it too. we don't know with the u.n. now this weekend is doing an inspection and we'll see what they report. i do want to go back to what jerry said about the obama foreign policy and make two points one to syria and one larger. if you look at how president obama is executing this, there's something -- it's almost an alternate universe. if you look at the headline of the "washington post" today.
8:16 am
obama will go it alone in syrian stride. think about that. this is a may be who in 2008 ran criticizing his predecessor for acting unilaterally. a charge which by the way was false. the bush administration got a coalition of nearly 50 countries to support them in the iraq war. barack obama cannot even put together a three country coalition. now the british have pulled out and the french are backing away. he's bypassed allies, bypassing nato and bypassing congress. public support is low in the history of gallop if we go forward on this. the way he is executing this is amazing. if you look at the arc of the policy on syria from the obama administration, you had hillary
8:17 am
clinton saying bashar al-assad was a reformer. entered the conflict, supported -- then the president said there will be a red line if syria used a chemical weapon. they used them and crossed the red line. nothing happened for months. now he is handed in this articulation of strategy and he's sending memos no bashar assad telling him when we'll strike, what we'll strike, what kind of weapons and how long it will last and making sure he understands that there will be no sustained damage to him or his regime.
8:18 am
host: we're seeing like this in the washington times talking about potential targets in syria. do you think some of this is a result of the information that's been put out there about what type of attack the obama administration is contemplating? guest: yes. those kinds of maps are known because we tend to know based on intelligence and just geopolitical thinkers what those sites are both in terms of chemical weapons is more difficult. in terms of air bases and so forth. host: paul is waiting on our independent line from chesapeake, virginia. paul you're on with peter wehner. caller: i like to say first, i really agree with caller from north carolina that chemical weapons come in all sizes and they can be used for many weapon delivery device. secondly, everybody seems to be calling that it's the neo cons
8:19 am
who are calling for war but it's the conservatives who seem to be calling for the president to come to congress. it's media who seems to be driving this war in the name of human rights and trying to push the president into it in the name of human rights. two other things, one, if it is found that the rebels used chemical weapons but the united states be taking action against the rebels and the last thing was the state department came out and made a statement that they would no credibility with the u.n. report. thank you and i like to hear mr. wehner's comment on that. guest: those are good questions. let me make one point that come up several times in terms of rebels. you have to disaggravate them what we mean by the rebels.
8:20 am
syria right now is a kind of all sorts of groups. i spoke to somebody the other day who been in syria for a week. he told me there are estimates of about 10,000 jihaddist rebels in syria right now. then you have roughly 20,000 of syrian free army, which are the more moderate and secular forces. then you have all sort of other groups in there. when we talk about rebels using chemical weapons, it depends on which rebel group that we're talking about. the idea that al qaeda affiliates would use chemical weapons wouldn't come as a surprise to anybody. i would expect they would use them if they had the capacity to do it. one other thing -- what people have to ask whether the assad
8:21 am
regime used chemical weapons. if he used chemical weapons, what should that demand in terms of american response. you can make different arguments about it. i do think that people need to ask themselves that question which if that line been crossed, do we have an obligation that act. host: i want to talk about that. i have people like senator john mccain who has been calling for action in syria. here's a statement just from two days ago from senator rand paul a republican of kentucky giving a very different opinion. he said the war in syria has no clear national security connection to the united states and victory by either side would not necessarily bring into power people friendly in the united
8:22 am
states. guest: its a very interesting one. you really have for the first time in several generations a real foreign policy fight in the republican party. the republican party since robert taft in the late 1940's and early 1950's has been an internationalist party. really starting with eisenhower. then you have this debate in 1970's with reagan and kissinger and nixon. believed in rollback of the soviet union rather than containment. all of the presidents, republican presidents and candidates really for that matter have been internationalist in the orientation. that now and that consensus isn't no longer exist. you have very spirited intense debate and it's going to grow
8:23 am
within the republican party. you see it manifest in various debates. you see it in the debate about n.s.a. insure veeps -- surveillance program. you see it with aid to egypt. there's no question what rand paul is leading the movement for a very different kind of republican foreign policy. i don't know who's going to prevail in that debate. we'll know when the republicans choose a nominee in 2016. host: go to john in minnesota on our republican line. caller: i was wondering why israel doesn't get involved? we pour all the money into israel. seem like this is more concerning them than us. they just sit back and don't do anything. just take our money. it's because of dick cheney and
8:24 am
the neocons that we can't get coalition that the rest of the world don't trust us because of iraq. host: what is israel doing now? guest: israel is doing what they ought to be doing. most of the world would want them to do is stand on the sidelines and their producting themselves and preparing themselves in case syria decides it use chemical weapons against them. i don't know anybody including critics of the president, wants israel to get involved in this. that would complicate issues as it relates to the arab world. if america acts, they have to act based on their judgment of interest. the notion that israel is taking our money and doing nothing is ludicrous. they are hugely helpful against
8:25 am
various malignant regimes in that region. we ought to stand with israel. it's a fantastic country. you can blame dick cheney and the neocons until the cows come home for not being able to build a coalition. i would say that the administration that dick cheney was a part of built fairly national coalition both in iraq and afghanistan. we're now five years into the obama presidency. at some point he becomes responsible for his own actions. he appears unable to get a coalition of more than one country, that one country being the united states. host: matt writes in on twitter. has peter wehner considered how the iraq debacle under mined the u.s.'s ability for intervention here? guest: yes. mad is a little confused. the iraq debacle he refers to
8:26 am
was really not a debacle by the end of the bush administration. that's not an opinion. that's an argument based on the facts. matt may want to go through and restudy his history. there were mistakes that happened with the iraq war which i talked about. we had the wrong immediate post war strategy but that was corrected in the surge and violence plummeted in 2007, 2008. iraq was a fairly specific country relative to the standards in the middle east. in terms of arab countries it was fairly democratic. the various ethnic groups was animosity. we had leverage in iraq against iran and president obama proceeded to pull out and surprise, what's happening? the situation in iraq is getting
8:27 am
worse. it is stunning. if you chose every country in the middle east today, the situation is worse now than when barack obama took office. that's the case in egypt. it's the case in turkey, case in pakistan and case in afghanistan, case in iran, case in iraq, case in syria, the case in lebanon and it's the case of jordan. that is unbelievable record. you can blame bush, i suspect like now will be doing that 50 years from now. at some point it becomes ludicrous. host: we're talking with peter wehner is the former senior advisory and speech write for the 2012 romney campaign. also worked for director of speech writer for the george w. bush white house. let's go to ann from oak bluff,
8:28 am
massachusetts on our democratic line. good morning. caller: hi. he criticized obama for taking our troops out of iraq when thank god. we spent a fortune in that country and we had our military damage so much the men coming back wounded and dead. he criticizes the president for taking us out? then when you talk about syria, if we go in, we only escalate the situation. we only make things worse. the violence will get worse. if you think you can blame the president for what's happening in the middle east, that's the biggest joke there is. thank you. guest: couple things. i think ann, probably isn't knowledgeable about the situation in iraq when president obama withdrew the troops. the american troops were not engaging in fighting. it was relatively small force
8:29 am
that was there. the violence was down. there were no american troops being killed and it was certainly small costs. what do did mean we did have a presence there and we did have leverage with the regime. what she's confusing is the situation in iraq in 2008 versus 2006 and 2007. then in terms of -- i'm not quite sure what her argument is. the person who wants to go into syria now is barack obama. he's the president. now you can blame george w. bush for a lot of things. i don't think you can blame him for the situation in syria or blame him for president obama doing military strikes in syria because syria has used chemical weapons. again, i wonder if the people who make these arguments understand how tired and stale these arguments are.
8:30 am
to blame president bush for the situation in the middle east in every country and to say that president obama has been president for five years, there's no responsibility, i think it's ludicrous. ly say this, these things are complicated. i don't pretend the united states is only -- if you examine the president and his words what he said before he was president at a dawn of his presidency h he will usher in a new dawn by smart power and so forth. he is the one that described the situation in the middle east will be. it's nothing like that. host: let's try one more call
8:31 am
from maryann from new jersey on independent line. you will be our last caller with peter wehner. caller: i'm concerned my biggest question that i'm not hearing a lot about is the implication especially if the united states unilaterally punishes syria. i don't know enough about their potential the power. i see that seem to be unethical and no respect for persons. what are the potential for retaliation on us? guest: good question. there's several ways. one will be to have chemical weapons used against israel. it's likelihood could happen. you could have a terrorist against american interest and american embassies. that's why i think it is so important if we get involved, we get involved in the right way.
8:32 am
we get involved in a way that alters the facts on the way or we shouldn't get involved at all. this therapeutic bombing which will energize our enemies will be terrible. host: peter wehner former senior advisor and former speech write for the romney campaign. you can follow him on twitter, wehner appreciate you coming on. up next we'll take a look at america's mental healthcare system where ron honberg. later we'll have weekly america by the number series. this week we're taking a look at college costs and financial aid. we'll be right back.
8:33 am
>> c-span, we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you. putting you in the room at congressional hearings white house events, briefings and conferences all as public service. where c-span created by the cable tv 34 years and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. >> the arc of the moral universe made bend towards justice but it doesn't bend on its own. to secure the gains this country
8:34 am
has made requires constant vigilance, not complacency. by challenging those who erect new barriers to the vote or ensuring that the scales of justice work equally for all in the justice system is not simply a pipeline for underfunded schools. it requires vigilance. >> this weekend on c-span, from wednesday, the 50th anniversary of the march on washington. live sunday on c-span 2, your calls and comments for editor at large ben shapiro. on c-span 3's american history tv, tour the u.s. war constellation. the last all sale worship built in 1854 by the u.s. navy. "washington journal" continues. host: america's mental
8:35 am
healthcare system is under going plenty of change whether it's reduction due to sequestration or new requirement from the affordable care act. joining us now to discuss these issues and how mental illness is viewed in america today is ron honberg of the national alliance on mental ilness. let's start with the major new healthcare law that the obama administration is working to implement. how is the law changing the mental healthcare system in the united states? guest: good morning. thank you for having me on. there is great potential that the affordable care act could change the mental health system for the better. really there are two dimensions of it that could be very beneficial. first, the state insurance exchanges, the marketplaces, are required to cover mental health and substance because benefits on par at a parody level with all other medical disorders. that is really very positive development.
8:36 am
it's the result of a federal law passed before the affordable care act. the question is, what does that mean and how is that going to play out in the states. i'm sure your viewers know states are right now working on developing their arrangements to the state, all the different insurance plans that might be available to people who purchase insurance. we really don't have enough information at this point about what specific benefits will be covered to say exactly what the impact is going to be but we're working very hard to make sure the benefits are adequate. there's a second piece of this that's probably more important and that is the medicaid expansion. people with mental illnesses are among the largest group of people who could be added to the medicaid roll. that's the million dollar question, as we know the supreme court said it's optional for states to expand their medicaid program. so far we know that 23 states
8:37 am
are expanding medicaid programs. some states, up to 30% of the new beneficiaries that are added will be people of mental illness. 27 states haven't decided. we're asking what are they waiting for. if they're interested in improving their mental health issues and cutting costs, know need to move forward. host: the white house has been keen about promoting different ways the affordable care act will be helping the mental health community and those are dealing with mental health problems. they talk about pre-preventive services offered for mental health issues and the
8:38 am
preexisting conditions standard also applying to mental illnesses that people can't be denied of cover because of preexisting mental illness condition if you want to talk about those. guest: that's also very important because even though many people have mental illnesses being so disabling that people can't work. that's not true at all. many people will mental illness if they receive appropriate treatment can recover and work. because they have a preexisting psychiatric diagnosis, they're not going if get insurance at all. eliminating preexisting conditions is huge. host: is it the mental health community hope the affordable care act will do for people with mental illness? guest: there's been so many
8:39 am
problems with the mental health systems. there's so many steps that can be taken to improve it. there's always more things that can be done. over all i have to say that congress for the first time was really attentive to mental illness and substance abuse disorder. really signified something very important that these are illnesses like any other and needed to to be included in any efforts to solve health insurance problems. host: ron honberg is national director for the national alliance on mental illness. we're talking about your calls or questions. reps can -- republicans can give us a called a 202-585-3881, democrats 202-585-3880, independents 202-585-3882. if you're outside the u.s., it's
8:40 am
(202)585-3883. only stats from your organization we want to show viewers. about 61.5 million adults experience mental illness each year. one out of 17 adults have serious mental illness. 60% of adults receive no treatment for mental illness last year and half of chronic mental illness begins at the age of 14. we use mental illness a lot in that slide. explain how your group defines mental illness. guest: mental illness are disorders if untreat have had a profound negative impact on people ability to function in a day-to-day basis. function in school, if they're children, function in the workplace, function in society. difficulties perhaps with
8:41 am
concentration and also it can impact on people's grasp of reality. for example, schizophrenia, person experiencing them every bit as real, unreal to people who don't understand. the important thing for people to remember is that these illnesses like every other. they actually really treatable through a combination of medication, and psychosocial support. because as you said, 60% of people with serious mental illness don't receive treatment, their symptoms get worse. that's not different when you think about it. heart disease or cancer or
8:42 am
diabetes, what impact -- if 60% of all heart disease don't get treatment, the rates of fatal heart attacks will be higher. ditto with cancer, we made such great progress in cancer research and treating cancer. but if these treatments weren't available, people would get sicker and the impact not only on those individuals but on society will be profound in terms of costs. but that's the mental health system we have in this country. host: you want to talk about the state of the mental health system with ron honberg. our phone lines are open. for those that don't know what the alliance is. talk about your group. guest: we are an organization, grassroots organization. we exist throughout the united states. we have 1100 affiliates. pretty much in every state and virtually every community or every large community throughout
8:43 am
the united states. we were created as a grassroots advocacy and support organization initially by families of people with serious mental illnesses who realize not only there was no support available, there was tremendous stigma and misunderstanding about their illnesses. with the grassroots movement, it started in communities around the country and eventually -- we opened up. our affiliates are very engaged in trying to improve the system. it's really truly a grassroots
8:44 am
movement in the finest sense of the word. host: mike is waiting from dover, ohio our independent line. caller: hi, i'm bipolar. i've been diagnosed that since about five or six years ago. the county i live in ohio has a very weak mental health department. they can't keep anybody longer than four or five months. when you go for treatment, every time you go it's another person that you talking to. they had one counselor that believed in cognitive therapy and that seem to be working and he moved on also. i hear all of these republicans with the gun control that we have to do something about mental health all the time they trying to cut the healthcare act. we've got a serious problem in this country. the fact of the matter is,
8:45 am
nobody really cares about it. you can say what you want but the fact remains you can't. i was on abillfy for a while. that was $500 a month. i deputy have insurance -- didn't have insurance. host: mike that the changes that you experienced recently, was any of this due to sequestration? was any of it blamed on funding for sequestration when it comes to how you gotten your coverage? caller: no, it has a lot to do of no doctors that are in the field. there aren't doctors out there that know what to do. in one week i was on five different anti-psychotic drugs. it takes a month for one to get into your system.
8:46 am
inside one week, he switched me three different times. i was so screwed up, i didn't know what was going on. guest: mike, first of all, thanks for your call. telling your story makes a real difference. we have a really strong group in ohio. we have a strong organization in ohio. you telling your story, you getting up and particularly making people understand what you go through, really does make a difference particularly if there are other people like you who will do that. what you talk about unfortunately is true. there are two real problems -- two of the big problems in our field now, there's not enough people out there. there's a workforce. the mental health workforce is
8:47 am
inadequate. people really struggle to find somebody who takes the time to understand what their needs r develops an appropriate plan in partnership with them. when they do find that person, this was illustrated in mike story, after a while that person leaves and they have to start all over again. certainly, fixing the mental health workforce, making it more attractive for people to become psychiatrist, psychologist, social workers, counselors all of those things isly important. i certainly think that if we can continue to work to destigmatize mental ill indianapolis and make people understand we're talking about medical disorders, that will be a significant step forward. i also think if we can improve the reimbursment of treatment providers, which i hope will happen through the affordable care act and some other steps,
8:48 am
that will improve it as well. the story mike is telling i think we can find hundreds of thousands of people around the country who would tell a similar story. host: let's go to david from pennsylvania our republican line. caller: i have a question about your statistic that you said a few minutes ago. is that for americans with these diseases and illnesses or is that like the world as large? guest: the percentages, david, you mentioned one in four people live with mental health condition in any given year. serious mental illness we're talking about one in 17 people. those are united states statistics. one in 17, that's not a great mathematician. that comes to about 7% of all americans. yes, what we're talking about
8:49 am
the most serious illnesses, schizophrenia, bipolar, major depression, panic disorder, the major anxiety disorders, excessive compulsion disorder. we're talking about one in 17 of all americans. much higher than most people realize. host: let's go to joy now calling in from california on our democratic line. you're on with ron honberg. caller: good morning. i want to thank mr. honberg for his work in this field. i'm 5 had now, -- i'm 54 now, when i was in my early 20's, he a 2-year-old daughter. out of nowhere. my life was going good. there was no external forces going on. i went into a depression where i could not care for my daughter. my dad was living in san
8:50 am
francisco, i called him down. i go i can't even get up and feed her. i was paralyzed with depression. fortunately, because of my folks and my brothers, they all pitched in. i got the help i needed both with medication and with therapy. i told the doctor once that i would have rather heard that i was diagnosed with cancer than to have this depression. one good thing i want to point out is that we catch these types of depressions or other issues like ptsd or the other things that the doctor mentioned. you can commit suicide. lot of people didn't have this. with affordable care act if a person can stay on their policy
8:51 am
until their 26, lot of times in their early 20's, they can get a old on that. i'm glad this guy is our guest. it's not something you can control. host: the stats on the suicide issue that you bring up. suicide is 10th leading cause of death in the u.s. and third leading cause of death for ages 15 to 24. more than 90% of those who die by suicide had more than one mental disorder. guest: that's true. thank you joy your story illustrates what i'm talking about which is that people get the help they need. i appreciate you telling your story. with regard to suicide, i've heard many stories over the
8:52 am
years, talked to many people who families have been touched by suicide. one thing that really strikes me, these are individuals who ultimately choose to end their lives. have fought such tremendous battles to try to overcome the devastating effects of their illnesses and have run into barriers pretty much everywhere they turn. in terms of where they getting treatment but also being accepted. it's very sad but it's known that you're diagnosed with a mental illness. think about how we respond to somebody who goes out on disability due to cancer. we put our arms around the person. we bring food to the person's house. we do everything we can to support the person and the family. if news gets out that somebody was diagnosed of a mental illness, the response is sometimes we shun the person.
8:53 am
we don't talk to the person. we're embarrassed around the person. when they come back to work we make decisions that are adverse to the person. we demote the person. we assume that the person can't handily the same level of responsibility on the job. all of that isn't true. that has a terrible impact on people who feel they're not only struggling to overcome an illness but they're being shunned. that's a price that very few people can really tolerate in their lives. host: you talked about the importance of stabilizing the mental health system in the united states. let's talk about the issue of sequestration and how it impacted the mental health system. guest: i would say that sequestration is making a very bad problem worse. it's important for your viewers and listeners to know that prior
8:54 am
to sequestration, we over the course of the period of the recession, 2009 to 2012, we cut over $4 million from our public mental health system. so $4 billion was cut primarily in state funding. when you add to that some of the medicaid cuts occurred, the numbers are astronomical. the impact, we've done several reports, i invite your view to go to our witness, they're fairly simple report. what we found in states the impact of the budget cuts was double whammy. not only community programs but hospitals were closed. hospital beds were eliminated. people had no place to go to get treatment. mental health has been described
8:55 am
as a downstream system. what i mean by that, preventive care, early identification and intervention of illness, continuity of care has been nonexistent. you literally have to wait until the situation becomes an emergency before someone can get help. i bet you there are people listening and watching now who will tell you stories about having called 911 and being told to wait until your family member becomes dangerous. add to that sequestration where we have seen a across the board cuts to domestic programs in this country, the effects made it worse. the federal government plays an important role in funding research on mental illness. a major study funded by the national institute of mental health to better understand the early symptoms of schizophrenia and determine how you can
8:56 am
effective intervene early basis is on hold because of sequestration. we've seen cuts to mental health services. we've seen cuts to federal housing programs. housing is one of the key components of recovery for mental illness. people with mental illness are the most impoverishes of all americans. the waiting list is long in communities. the cuts are only making it worse. we haven't seen the worse of it yet. i really urge congress -- congress needs to act quickly to end sequestration and restore funding for these programs. host: ronny on twitter talked. what she's seeing. group homes are closing and medications and appointments now have copayment, mco's are denying service. guest: those are private
8:57 am
companies contracted by state medicaid agencies to manage mental health benefits. ronny say it better than i do. now we're starting to see the impact of sequestration in communities. host: its go to ellen from waterford, connecticut on our independent line. caller: i want to say thank you you and your organization for what they are doing. i know it's appreciated in connecticut. i actually wanted to hit on a point of when you were mentioning schizophrenia early onset. are they going to be doing anything, may be more screening, more education in school system? i believe -- i work for a young adult program for mental health and substance abuse. if we can more education out to
8:58 am
the school system, we can deal with coping skills and be able to press forward. guest: i want to thank you. you raise a very important point and certainly in connecticut in particular, the importance of effective intervention as early as possible has been talked about a lot. it is a real problem. again, i don't want to criticize our schools. they have very important and difficult jobs, the fact is the school system have not been prepared adequately to respond to children who are experiencing mental illnesses. fact the dropout rates for youth with mental disorders is the highest of any group over 50% of dropouts. it's a big problem. school counselors are overwhelmed. they tend to focus. there's been such an emphasis in recent years. i'm not criticizing it.
8:59 am
there's been such an emphasis on testing and college placement. if there is a child who is clearly manifesting the symptoms of severe mental or emotional distress, often times the school system response is to try to get rid of that child. then the child falls through the cracks. what we really need is our resources for school based mental health services. we need better training of school personnel about mental illnesses. there's also federal legislation to put resources into better school based mental health services. i will tell you ellen, i seen some examples in places you might not expect. for example in louisiana, done progressive things on mental health. where they had a demonstration
9:00 am
project they located people from the local mental health system in the local school. they found that really made a big difference in terms of over all performance, in terms of lessening symptoms and coordinating care. ....
9:01 am
calls for about the next 15 minutes or so. on our next from florida republican line. good morning. 100% disabled veteran who was traumatized and the service and it is in my military file. why is it that went, it is like these crimes committed against me while serving a country, when these crimes were committed against me, why am i categorized as mental and why do i have to be diagnosed for a treatment when crimes are committed against me? why is that called mental? thanks fort of all,
9:02 am
your service, and i am really sorry that you experienced what you did. my heart goes out to you. i do not know the details of your case, but i can tell you that there are a lot of veterans diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder which can occur as a result of a number of different traumatic events. most calmly think about posttraumatic stress disorder in the context of service and war geared we see a lot of a rock and afghanistan veterans return with posttraumatic stress disorder which has had a profound impact on their lives. but sexual trauma can also cause posttraumatic stress disorder. it is important to understand that being diagnosed with a mental health disorder, mental illness, is not your fault. it is not something you should be blamed for. just like if you are diagnosed with cancer, it is not something
9:03 am
you should be blamed for. it is a diagnosis. you get a diagnosis so there is clarity in terms of what your condition is. and most importantly, what treatment you should receive. host: are you still there? caller: that is my argument. the victims of the catholic church are not categorized as mental. they got fat paychecks. why can a veteran not get a fat paycheck and not be called mental? guest: i do not think we have done well by our veterans. i know there are efforts by congress and the administration to try and do better. there have been a lot of resources page of the mental health needs of veterans over recent years. try to spend is to the money in a way that is the most effective, and i know that the va is trying to do that. i want to point out to viewers that a lot of veterans do not go through the va to get treatment.
9:04 am
they show up in the public mental health system, and the public mental health system has not historically been geared up to respond to the needs of veterans either. there are efforts underway. if you are not getting the kind of services, either through the va or through the mental health system, that you need, you should be. again, i would urge you to get involved with local advocacy iroups, with your local nam group, and others so you can get the help you need. i wish you the best. is the website for the national alliance on mental illness. we have a call on our democratic line. you are on with ron honberg. caller: hi, ron. , for puttingspan these horrible diseases on the news. because these are diseases that we usually want to keep under the mattress so that nobody
9:05 am
should know about it and families and anywhere else. arresteder has been and locked up in the mental institution for eight years. because of her illness. she was arrested because she was had filed car that i is lost to the police. she has been there for eight years. i have tried everything to get her out. during the past year come as she was doing ok all of a sudden, because of sequestration and , they're getting nervous and she is completely being battered in there. not sure she is sick enough anymore. drained heruring --
9:06 am
brain. it is to the point where it is not completely her brain. have immigration status in order to take her out of the hospital. the doctors will go to the court saywhy did the judge and she has these medical problems --ply because [indiscernible] talking -- what about the issue of mistreatment inside the mental health system? the criminal justice system. something i have worked a lot on is about thes reality of the jails and prisons and also forensic psychiatric hospitals, which it sounds like where her daughter is, and there are five or six times as many
9:07 am
people with serious mental illnesses in jails and prisons in this country as there are in hospitals. in these are not people, for the most part, who are violent criminals. these are people who have oferiorated and spiraled out control because they have not gotten the help that they need. criminal justice systems are ill-equipped to respond to the needs of people with mental illnesses. one thing i wanted to mention to viewers, there is a small but very important program told the justice and mental health corroboration act that gives resources to communities to diverge people from criminal justice systems into community treatment to get the services and supports they need. it is one of those programs that i called the little engine that could. it has minimal funding, 10 million dollars. a number of communities have done wondrous things. we urge congress to pass some of
9:08 am
the things that have been stalled. we know a lot of people like your daughter -- even if they do not end up in prison, they are in for an sick hospitals which are hospital set up specifically to treat people who have criminal charges. maybe they are not competent to stand trial. maybe they are not guilty by reason of insanity. many of these places have inadequate staffing ratios and the staff get edgy. sometimes the consequence is bad for the individual. have so-called hospitals become indistinguishable from prisons. i would urge two things. it will not solve your problems immediately, but if you can get involved in an advocacy group and a group that provides the system knows how works in florida and can help
9:09 am
you not just be a lone voice but part of a group, that would be very beneficial. first, i urge you to contact nami florida, based in tallahassee, but they have affiliates throughout the state. there is also florida partners ofcrisis, a coalition sheriffs and police chiefs and mental health advocates. they do very, very good things come about to try to get people out of incarceration and also to get more resources into the mental health system. she does not need to be treated like a criminal. --t: a question on twitter is it possible that these kids are being overdiagnosed? half of american kids are already on medication. guest: the issue of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders, the number of children diagnosed with that and the number of children on adhd medications, there has been a lot of talk about that.
9:10 am
here is the reality, yes, there may be some children out there who are being diagnosed and administered medications prematurely. medications should not always be the first resort. medication should only be part of the treatment plan. but there are also just as many kids, maybe more than the kids who are being wrongly diagnosed, who are not being diagnosed when they need help. i do want to mention something -- i do want to address something that she brought up as well, and that is that she is worried that her daughter is losing her brain because she is so medication -- so medicated. these medications can be a godsend for people. they can do wonders to alleviate the voices, the terrifying hallucinations that people are experiencing. but medications are not with other side effects. people can also be overmedicated . we hear stories of people being on four or five different our full antipsychotics at once.
9:11 am
it is called polypharmacy. that is not a good thing. like with any other medical , medical the treatment treatment with medication needs to be carefully monitored. good clinical management should avoid that kind of scenario. yeary, pennsylvania, our independent line. caller: can he talk about the itstionship of diet and relevance with mental illness, if there is one? guest: hello. of coarse, i am not a psychiatrist. i am a lawyer. i may sound like a psychiatrist, but i am not. i can tell you, i have not heard illness.ausing mental i have heard of wonderful benefits people can derive throughprop her -- proper nutrition, exercise, and steps they take to improve improving the
9:12 am
course of treatment. we know a lot of people with serious mental illnesses have reoccurring health problems as a result of the last i'll -- their lifestyle, diet, and medications. so you should diet, exercise, and use proper nutrition. texas on our republican line. caller: good morning, mr. honberg. i am a 100% disabled veteran from vietnam. it took me five years to get at the dallas hospital. it is a good hospital. i'm not trying to knock the hospital down, but they need so many improvements in their. they are losing records, and
9:13 am
this is a common thing. all the veterans i know, they lose your records. they have all kinds of tricks. you are crying out for help. you come back with these terrible nightmares. you see young children, babies, old people being killed, fromated by side effects normal. which is you cannot expect to have a war without innocent people getting hurt. but for an individual to withstand all that, they need mental health care, and they need to be treated before they are put act in society.
9:14 am
company that for a . have worked for for 40 years four times i was suspended because people knew i was a veteran, they would sneak up bang, and run. younews on tv and more, name it, we cannot forget it. we cannot forget it. , john bringsberg up some of the needs of the mental health system. there has been a big push, specially post the new town tragedy in connecticut at the end of last year, there was originally a big push for more mental health initiatives in the united states. what has happened since then, since december? yeah, and john, thank
9:15 am
you. actually, i have been encouraged her to have been discouraged because it is certainly an issue that is discouraging because the focus was all on guns. i understand why the focus was on guns, but the reality is that, you know, when it comes to tweaking our mental health reporting requirements and gun laws, it is not going to make without of difference addressing the big problems in our mental health system and the big holes in our mental health system. i applaud many members of congress on both sides of the thee for understanding that focus needs to be more broadly on improving mental health. for example, the obama administration had a big summit recently on mental health and how we can improve our mental health system. they have really done something very smart. they have used it to foster bylaws and communities around
9:16 am
our country. it has already taken place in albuquerque and there will be a number of other communities were you bringing together a bunch of stakeholders, and some that you would not expect, you know, from church groups, civic groups, from chambers of commerce and others, because mental health and mental illness affects all segments of society. what they are trying to do in these communities is bring together all these different stakeholders and figure out strategies for developing a better mental health response to people. and most importantly, figuring out how all these systems can play a role here it from that we can see the development of private/public partnerships. there is a lot of private money out there going into trying to address these problems, trying to foster innovation and sustainability. we are starting to see the seeds of that. that is really the goal of the administration's initiatives.
9:17 am
so far it is still alive. i have been at nami for 25 years and have seen other types of tragedies like this. our attention span is not very long, after three or four once people stop talking. but congress is still talking. the administration deserves credit for that. i hope we will continue in a positive and constructive way to talk about mental health in the years to come. is the policyerg and legal affairs national director at the national alliance on mental illness. you can check out his work at or on twitter @namicommunicate. thanks so much for joining us this morning. next, we will have our weekly america by the numbers segment. jack buckley and mark schneider will join us to discuss a new education department report on college costs and the increasing need for federal aid.
9:18 am
>> one of the most fun times i ever had, it was 2006 and it looked like democrats really were going to take back over the house. it was looking pretty bad for republicans. vice president cheney's office
9:19 am
called to see if we could come over and have breakfast with him. we went to his residence and had breakfast with him. i had met him before. first of all, it is unbelievable how much he knew about individual -- i mean, he has been to so many of these districts over the years as one of the republican leaders of the house. basically, he was sort of asking us -- how bad is this? yep, it is saying -- pretty bad. but that is kind of fun when you get to do that or talk to people from both sides and you kind of get a glimpse of the inside players. >> with more than 30 years as a political analyst, charlie cook has covered the trends while tracking every congressional race since 1984. the rest of this interview sunday night at 8:00 on c-span. >> very often what you see as the causes of the first lady
9:20 am
become so entwined with her image that she keeps that cause and that image through the rest of her life. i mean, we could talk about rosalynn and her commitment to mental health and we could talk about barbara bush and her commitment to literacy and her foundation, betty ford and her commitment to sobriety and addiction. >> monday night, historians on season two on the original : influencest ladies and image." 21st ladies, looking at their private lives and public roles. monday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span radio, and c- but it does not bend on its own. countrye the gains this
9:21 am
has made requires constant vigilance, not complacency. whether it is by challenging tose who erect new barriers the boat or insuring that the scales of justice work equally for all and the criminal justice system is not simply a pipeline from underfunded schools to over crowded jails. span, fromekend on c- wednesday, the 50th anniversary of the march on washington, starting saturday morning at an :00 eastern. live sunday on c-span2, your calls and comments for ben schapiro. tv, toward history constellation, the last all sail warship built by the u.s. navy am a sunday at 7:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. " washington journal" continues -- host: each week in the segment
9:22 am
of the "washington journal," we take our viewers there are america by the numbers. we will be discussing a recent education department report that details the continuing rise of college education costs and how that has impacted financial aid for students. jack buckley from the department of education's national center for education statistics and mark schneider, president of the group college measures, is joining us this week for this discussion. commissioner buckley, i want to take you to this headline from the "washington post" in a new series that started just this week with the title -- the tuition is too damn high. what do we know about the cost of tuition these days and how that has gone up in recent years? there is a lot of variation, but one thing common is if you look back over 15 to 20 years, the real cost has gone
9:23 am
up across the board just about. so we think probably about half, maybe a little more than half, of undergraduate students are in four having your institutions. about 31% are in public , four-yours, state institutions. we have seen tuitions rise about total.0,000 a year, tuition, fees, room and board, the actual cost of attendance. today, just over $10,000, closer to $17,000 a year now. and if you want to talk through the numbers, this is with four having your institutions. the green line, average total cost for full-time students in degree-granting institutions her year. by 2011, it was getting close to $25,000. in 1999, it was closer to
9:24 am
$16,000. $12 chart was in 2011-20 your it explained the red, black, and blue lines as well. guest: it shows a great increase in the cost of attendance for private nonprofit institutions. watch raw-your private colleges .nd universities anything from stanford to a small private liberal arts school, four-year school. and those are the highest cost of attendance. that is what people think of when they think of the highest cost colleges. those have gotten quite large. host: the black line is private for-profit institutions. about 8% of students. these are the kinds of institutions you often see you might, you know, see them on a bus or in the paper. there is a lot of marketing around these institutions.
9:25 am
they are often run by publicly- traded companies. niche is easier to access education for working adults, nontraditional students. about 8% of the students. you see ane where decline. to some extent they have lowered tuition. these are places like the university of phoenix and devry. thesewhy are we seeing different cost curves between the different institutions? guest: i think the biggest explanation, especially in public institutions, is they cut back in state appropriations. someone has to pay for this. higher education is a very heavily subsidized industry. it has to be paid for by some combination of state subsidies, state appropriations, federal money, and alternately students make up the difference.
9:26 am
as state appropriations have gone down in many institutions, especially the four-your public institutions that are not research universities some of these are the institutions that .ost students attend there they were courses of american higher education. and they have been hit strongly with cutbacks in state aid. somehow the shortfall has to be made up. increasingly we are looking at tuition rises to make up the shortfall as state appropriations decline. host: we're talking today about the rising cost of college education, and we want to hear your thoughts, your questions for commissioner buckley and mr. schneider eared we set up our lines a little bit differently in this segment. teachers, 202-585- 3880. teachers, 202-585-3881. administrators, 202-585-3882. all others, 202-585-3883.
9:27 am
we will keep those numbers on the screen so you can pick which number to call in. but the phone lines are open. as we are waiting for folks to call, commissioner buckley, take as through the president's recent proposal to lower this cost curve that we're looking at. guest: there is an awful lot in the president's proposal. may be the most ambitious required congressional action. i think the most ambitious is the president has stated a policy goal of trying to tie federal aid. grants, federal subsidized loans, tie eligibility and the amount alleges can receive to some set of outcome measures to show that the colleges are actually providing education that enables their students to get gainful employment and can't be able to pay back those loans and be a productive member of the economy -- and can be able to pay back those loans and be a
9:28 am
productive member of the economy. some actually are within the control of the department in the shorter run, such as trying to get more students to take advantage of the income based payment or the program called pay as you earn which are waived to modify what students pay back in the immediate years after graduation. those are moving much faster. host: this is the president from a recent stop in buffalo, new york, talking about his affordability plan. [video clip] >> iem leading an effort to develop a new rating system for america's colleges before the 2015 college year. right now, private rankings like u.s. news & world report puts andeach year their rankings encourages a lot of colleges to focus on ways to -- how do we gain the numbers, and it actually rewards them in some cases for raising costs. i think we should ray colleges based on opportunity.
9:29 am
are they helping students from all kinds of backgrounds? [applause] and on outcomes, on their value to students and parents. so that means metrics like how much debt does the average student leave with? how easy is it to pay off? how many students graduate on time? how well do those graduates do in the workforce? because the answers will help parents and students figure out how much a valuate college truly offers. there are schools out there who were terrific values, but there are also schools out there that have higher default rates than graduation rates. and taxpayers should not be subsidizing students to go to schools where the kids are not graduating from. that does not do anybody any good. the: mark schneider is president of college measures,
9:30 am
here to talk about this plan. talk about how it is being taken by the school system and by folks outside? guest: higher education has gotten a pass on productivity and outcomes measures for way too long. this is a radical proposal. it will not take effect in 2018 which is two years after the president is out of office and four years after he becomes an official lame duck. so i am not optimistic about much of this taking place. i think that there is a big difference between getting these numbers for informational purposes, which is what i do, and trying to get numbers out about the graduation rates at about gainful employment, and regulation. i think it is much easier to imagine how you can get the data out for informational purposes than trying to combine it into a single metric that would be used for regulation. one example is that if you take debt, andn rates, an
9:31 am
gainful employment measures and you want to rank them, what is the rate increase and who determines what the rates are to get a single number? it is not impossible. he can be done. u.s. news & world report is a proprietary system, and people are gaining all the time. it is doubly rewarding bad behavior. i am not sure if the government ht on things like graduation rates versus earnings. a system that is very complicated and people will try to figure out how to gain it. host: we are separating phones like -- phone lines by parents and students, teachers, administration, and others. tor from michigan, you are on. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.
9:32 am
just a quick question or suggestion, perhaps. it seems like to me the current model is not working anymore. member inlitary germany, and it seemed that they had a model which worked pretty decently where the government and the private sector went hand-in-hand and offered college basically to students on a cradle-to-grave type basis. and it was a lot cheaper overall. host: mr. schneider, talk about that proposal and explain what college measures actually does. aest: college measures is company that works with states to take their wage data gathered by the unemployment insurance oftem -- people think unemployed men enter and as someone is out of work and they get a monthly or biweekly check. actually, those checks are based on premiums that companies pay
9:33 am
on the basis of those wages that they pay to their employers. we have linked student graduation records with the wage you, forwe can tell example, the graduate at every program in every public institution in the state of texas, how much they are earning after they graduate. this has much more finer detail than the president's proposal which would have institutional data. the problem is that graduates from engineering programs, for example, earn way more than graduates from sociology programs. math majors make a lot more than bio majors, for example. so we need to drill down in much finer detail about what the returns are at the program level , because that is what students graduate from with degrees in sociology or psychology, for example. we then need to be able to tell what the rois like
9:34 am
is for each program. we need that kind of data. it is very important in terms of -- ofsue of law borrowing. you should not borrow more than your expected first-year earnings. so if we can tell you you your expected earnings is $25,000 you should not be borrowing $75,000. but if you are expecting $80,000 or $90,000 with an engineering degree, borrowing $40,000 is actually a great investment. host: mr. buckley, talk about what he found in terms of borrowing issues and where that is trending. up,t: if costs are going people need to borrow more, especially in this economy. it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. there are a lot of different ways you can get aid to pay for college. grants from the federal government, from states, from
9:35 am
the institutions. you can get loans, subsidized or unsubsidized federal loans. of course, private lending. there are other smaller programs like veterans benefits. but across-the-board, basically for all undergraduates, more than 70% of people need some sort of assistance. that number that number just keeps going up your at it has been going up every four years that we have been tracking it. trend is pretty constant about -- across the board. host: george from new hampshire, you are on. thanks for taking my call. good morning to you, gentlemen, and thank you. this subject came up with couple of months ago, and i called at that time. it was in reference to an hadrview that brian lamb some 15, maybe 20 years ago, and the discussion was along the same lines as you gentlemen are
9:36 am
approaching today. -- the gentleman at a chart that showed all of the major colleges, summer between 15 and 20 colleges from top to bottom, and the amount of money that they received in the form of either private donations or foundations -- no federal money at all, and the statement was made, and i hope that they can find that somewhere, but i was wondering if you are familiar with it. that is made colleges wanted to, forents could go to college no cost at all because of the money that these foundations and private donations are giving. i was wondering if any of you are familiar with that particular thought that was brought up that many years ago? thank you very much, and i will listen off air. buckley, i know your
9:37 am
organization crunches a lot of the numbers. striking, but there are an awful lot of colleges, post secondary institutions in the united states, thousands, and the vast majority of those institutions have no endowment. they rely upon tuition and fees to keep the lights on and the doors open. so when people think that because of the media or the mental image of college, we think of these ivy-covered private institutions, but that is a very small percentage of what we're talking about. even within those institutions institutions, once you go down , the endowments start to get so small that they could not cover anything close to operating costs. i think what was in the news right before the bubble burst and the economy a few years back, some of the very most elite am a most wealthy, biggest endowment private and stood tuition for like harvard, stanford, they were talking about making it essentially no tuition for middle-class and below students.
9:38 am
they had to roll back some rogue rams were they were going to use their endowment to subsidize most of their student body. they have for many years subsidized lower income students for institutional grants. very wealthy institutions will often do that but not across the board. very few institutions can actually afford to do that. host: two tweets i want you to address -- host: talk about the state of issues. guest: administrative load is a new term being floated around a lot. wayact, if you look at the in which colleges are allocating the money, the instructional expenditures are relatively flat compared to the increases in other parts of their expenditures.
9:39 am
that salaries are what drives institutions. budgetre institutional is not increasing rapidly, usually the biggest part of the budget -- administrative load, i think there was a study last week talking about how much per student is increasing -- host: a federal study? a private study. about $35 for each student to overpaidsome of the presidents. yes, i believe that administrative load is an issue, but it is really not what is driving the giant costs. the giant cost are being driven by the drop in state appropriations and public institutions. that is really what is behind most of it. going back to the issue of the endowment, jack is right, once
9:40 am
you get past harvard and stanford, you're talking about schools -- wellesley, over ledges had their credit rating downgraded because they do not have enough money. host: linda from maryland on our line for parents. good morning. thomas good morning thank you. a close friend of mine one day was telling me that her son who ison in west eci pr over, maryland was asked to fill out an application, and he and it was in cursive. when he was in school the last , they had dropped the cursive teaching of writing.
9:41 am
he pushed through school those last three years, but he never gained that knowledge of cursive writing. because of that he cannot complete his application on a couple of the pages. so he asked them if he could bring his application home and he had to get his mom to help him do that. that is so sad. -- my opinionver is that should have never been taken out of the school system. military tofrom their families, their loved ones, the memories years ago of families putting their letters, their memories, and a shoebox to pass on and share with their grandchildren, great- grandchildren -- we are losing the true values. that has discouraged me the past
9:42 am
couple years. and she was so upset. , we'reark schneider talking about the cost of college and higher education these days, but linda brings up what people are getting what they are paying for, if you want to respond. guest: one of the biggest holes in the president's proposal, going back to that, is the absence of measured student learning outcomes, which is a difficult subject to even broach . a few years ago there was a study called academically adrift that argued that to use a standardized test, the amount of learning that students actually accumulated in the four years of college was minimal. there has been a lot of debate about that. more recent studies have argued that learning outcomes are what academically addressed identified. i think the measure of student learning outcomes is a giant .uestion
9:43 am
guest: i have a different question to speak to what linda was asking about. it is more about the application process theater people being prepared in high school to even let aloneollege, actually succeed in college? know teaching cursive is on the decline. i do not hear that very often. but i hear that more and more schools are moving to an electronic common application. there are other endeavors to do that. and it is easy to apply for financial aid electronically. on average, we are actually trying to make it easier to apply to college, but the private sector and government as well. host: you talk about preparing students for higher education. talk about some of the stats you found in terms of student's expectations as to whether they will pursue college education.
9:44 am
about: we survey students every 10 years. overwhelmingly, the vast majority of ninth graders and 10th graders tell us they expect to go on to more education after high school. most recently we talked to freshman in high school in 2009 and over 80% reported that they were likely to pursue at least some college. and you brought that up by socioeconomic status. 96% of thoseifth, ninth graders said that they expected to attain education beyond high school. within 81.2%. and that lowest fifth of those you talk to, just 65.2% say they expected to go on to higher education after high school. kids: almost two thirds of and families without educated parents, parents who did not complete high school or college, are still expecting that they
9:45 am
are going to go on to college there at what we have seen in reality is about -- of those who graduate, so maybe only about 80% overall of american high school students graduate on time, and only about 60% of those it directly enter some sort of college, two-year, four- year, by the next fall. ,hat is not the only window going to college. but certainly the realities are not matching people's expectations. that has, unfortunately, been true for some time. host: we are talking to jack abouty and mark schneider the increasing costs of higher education. we're taking your calls and comments. robert is up next from virginia beach, virginia, a student. caller: one of your guests had a good point about do not borrow more than you are expected to
9:46 am
make as your first year salary from your degree. but as a student, more of what i see is sometimes the schools will spend too much money on new gymnasiums or science labs to attract new students and they cannot really afford it. and that cost is directly passed on to the student in terms of rising tuition. and on the financial aid side, sometimes the middle-class does not really benefit. the pell grants help out the low-income students, but it is the toughest for the working middle right now to fund their college education. as much as we wish that the government could just lower tuition, that really cannot happen. it is just a tough situation right now. guest: there is a large debate about what drives the expenditures and colleges, and
9:47 am
there is something called the cost disease. that is that colleges compete for prestige. they compete -- and there is no limit to how high you want to go and the prestige ranking. so you do spend a lot of money on amenities to attract students. the more you charge, the more prestigious you seem. they increase tuition rates to make them look better. there is a debate about the extent to which the cost disease is real. there is a big debate about federal aid and federal loans acting to increase the costs of colleges because there is no constraints on or less constraints on what colleges can charge. i think this is a serious debate about the extent to which the
9:48 am
cost disease is real and the extent to which federal aid pushes that. host: some concerns with the president's proposal to rein in the costs. i have an e-mail from ron peterson that talks about this. so if the college needs to meet the graduation rates, what will they do? the same thing the k-12 system has done -- i wanted to give you a chance to respond to some of those concerns. guest: those are all excellent points. we do not write now have all the metrics of the outcome measures we need in order to make the president's proposal work. one of the most important things to do over the coming years, really this coming year, is to figure out what we have and what we need, what we have the authority to collect and what we net -- what we might need
9:49 am
congressional action to do. if you build an accountability system like this and do do not have the right metrics, exactly said,the writer institutions will figure out away to gain the system and nobody will be better off. mark mentioned the program level as opposed to institution-level earnings. looking at the long-term repayment rates and default rates and wages that folks are making. also learning outcomes which colleges are not expected to just generate workers for the economy. they are expected to teach people skills and knowledge that they have throughout their life. for a system like that, we will need better measures, absolutely. parent frome a silver spring, maryland. caller: this is a great opportunity. i used to work analyzing data
9:50 am
sets in a post secondary office of the department of ed. what i am kind of frustrated about is the lack of focus on the better product of students. right now, the dynamic is colleges are paying so much for a coach who makes many times more than a governor. adjunct.ulty, 75% are there is more stress on sushi delivery than just having the old peanut butter and tuna sandwiches. in other words, the public, i think, would support college is a lot more if there is a proactive and team sense of producing a better product and
9:51 am
providing better access. for example, with the stem program, science, technology, etc. and not to have colleges as a process but to motivate students to stay in these very critical areas. yes, i am saying a lot, but the primary focus is teach -- provide teachers who are focused on teaching, not having 75% adjuncts. and you can convince the public -- you know what, my kid is going to get a great chance at a university given the resources that are focused on their needs and not on ancillary needs. snyder -- mr. schneider? guest: many interesting points in that set of questions. back toe, and i will go
9:52 am
the very first question that we had, i believe that many of the best institutions in the country are actually community colleges that are working hard to figure out how to help students overcome some learning .eficiencies many students have chosen community colleges because they do not want bachelors degrees. but there are the best community colleges like the one in northern virginia, the valencia community college also. these colleges are working very closely with their local employers and local industries to try to figure out how to -- each students, give them the skills they need for high-paying jobs in the local economy. i understand about the liberal arts education and that there are many values to that, but i also understand that if you ask students why they go to college,
9:53 am
they go to college to get good jobs and higher wages. the best community colleges in the nation are doing that at a relatively low cost by working toh and lawyers and helping develop skills in students, for example, in high-tech manufacturing, construction trade, health care that lead to very high wage jobs in the local economy. this is a very important path that community colleges have taken and we need to recognize that. four-your comprehensive, some people call them the compass campuses. they used -- they usually have north, east thomas south, or west in the title. they need to learn some of the lessons that community colleges have already learned in terms of helping students understand what the job opportunities are, what the employment opportunities are, and working with local employers in the local economy to feed into the local economy. students can actually take on
9:54 am
important jobs that generate good wages. twittersuggestion on about the issue of wages -- buckley, wesioner talked about the higher rates of going to college and of the large numbers of kids these days in high school who expect to go to college. talk about with the education department found in terms of how prepared families are to pay for colleges. of highhort story, 80% school freshmen are expecting to go to college. a few are -- fewer than a third of their families have saved $10,000 or more towards that end. not $10,000 will necessarily get you very far, but it might give you two years of a pretty good public community college. it will not give you four years even at an inexpensive regional
9:55 am
school. host: the number is almost twice as high dating back to 1984. guest: those are not inflation- adjusted. so the trend would be a bit flatter if we adjusted those numbers. host: it is no secret that college is expensive. our families not making a big enough priority to save? what is the problem? guest: i have a personal story. my daughter has two young kids. savings plan 529 for each of her kids and sat down to try to do the math about how much to get in 20 years. quite frankly, she just cannot put away enough money each month to hit that target. i do not know what she is going to do. hopefully her courier will continue to get better and she will be able to figure out how
9:56 am
to save the money -- hopefully her career will get better. salaries that most people have will not be enough to generate the savings that people need to pay for a higher education 15 years down the road. from let's go to larry rockville, maryland on our parent line. a couple have comments. one is i think that these all my programs that some of the universities have done, i think if a student is really serious, that education is very close to being as good as being on campus and maybe not so wasteful in regards to time and so forth. the other thing i believe, work- study is very important. i have seen many people go to college and after they go to college, they are in the wrong area.
9:57 am
they hate teaching. so after four years of education, they have to go back because they are not in the right field. i think several things can be done. those are my comments. as far as the cost, i think the cost really should be tailored to -- not necessarily -- well, i will stop there because i have already said enough. host: what do we know about the rise of the online programs? that thereuld agree is a lot of promise there. another part of the president's proposal that i did not get too involves trying to take advantage of some of these rapid changes that we are seeing in post secondary education. they're promising new modes of delivery, different types of course material and coursework, and being able to reduce the costs. what is it that is making colleges so expensive? there are horror stories about overpaidivery and
9:58 am
coaches, but that is a very small percentage. at the end of the day, it is salaries, and they are not exorbitant salaries. if you can reduce the labor part of this through technology, i think you can rein in costs. host: mr. schneider, i will give you the last minute to talk about that. guest: there are definitely ways to bend the cost curve. online education is one of the most promising ones. but we have to get better at it. there is some evidence that it can work but not in the way it has been delivered up to now. if we get better at it, that is a definite way in which that we could possibly reduce costs. imagine shorter degrees. example, why is a bachelors degree a four-year degree even though most people take six years to get it -- why four
9:59 am
years? is it possible to imagine a three-year degree? the third part related to both of those is a big shift away from credit hours to copper tenancy-based education. that may ultimately drive the costs down. you get credit for what you learn. you demonstrate what you learn at your own pace. when you master a subject, you do not have to spend 14 weeks sitting in a classroom to show that you mastered it. you move on. host: mark schneider is the president of college measures. jack buckley, commissioner for the national center for educational statistics. thanks for coming on to the both of you this morning. that is our chauffeur today. we will see you right back here
10:00 am
the top senate foreign relations committee republican bob corker had this to say "i
disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 8/30/2013